(Another) Good Rejection from Witness
Though I appreciate the good rejection over the impersonal form rejectio
n obviously, I've been noticing a recent
phenomenon where I keep getting the same good (but also, very short) rejection from Witness. I'm not trying to sound ungrateful, but it's starting to lose its charm. I mean, if you like my writing so much, why not tell me what's the problem with my submission: is the voice just too "ethnic" for your tastes or is the scope too urban for typical bourgeois literary journals where it's all about broken families, alcoholism + child abuse? Actually, these are all rhetorical questions because I know it comes down to taste before anything else. There's a Least Common Denominator with technique, and then after that, it comes down to style, in other words, editorial taste.
Anyway, here's like the third rejection from Witness I've received that says this. It's not a bad sign of course, but the gloss is starting fade frankly. I'm over the good rejection phase of my life. I only post them here because I like to catalog my submissions + post auspicious responses, in whatever form.
So here it is. Again:
Dear Jackson Bliss:
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider your work. Unfortunately, this particular submission is not a good fit for us. We are impressed by your writing, though, and hope you will feel encouraged to submit again.
Sincerely,
The editors
Anyway, here's like the third rejection from Witness I've received that says this. It's not a bad sign of course, but the gloss is starting fade frankly. I'm over the good rejection phase of my life. I only post them here because I like to catalog my submissions + post auspicious responses, in whatever form.
So here it is. Again:
Dear Jackson Bliss:
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider your work. Unfortunately, this particular submission is not a good fit for us. We are impressed by your writing, though, and hope you will feel encouraged to submit again.
Sincerely,
The editors